1996 Ford Thunderbird vs. 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass
To start off, 1996 Ford Thunderbird is newer by 13 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass would be higher. At 4,601 cc (8 cylinders), 1996 Ford Thunderbird is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Ford Thunderbird weights approximately 300 kg more than 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass.
Because 1996 Ford Thunderbird is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1996 Ford Thunderbird. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Ford Thunderbird | 1983 Oldsmobile Cutlass | |
| Make | Ford | Oldsmobile |
| Model | Thunderbird | Cutlass |
| Year Released | 1996 | 1983 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 4601 cc | 2259 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 1620 kg | 1320 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5050 mm | 4850 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1850 mm | 1780 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2880 mm | 2680 mm |
